Maliki now supports new U.S. troop deal

By GottaLaff

Flip. Flop. Flip:

Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki has informed Iraq's presidency council that he now supports a security agreement with the United States, a Shiite Muslim legislator who's close to the premier said Friday.[...]

The only person who dissented was the Sunni vice president, Tariq al Hashimi.

Askari said Maliki planned to address the nation in coming days to ask for the people's support of the agreement, which Iraqi officials now call the "withdrawal agreement."

This would represent an about-face for the Shiite prime minister, who was a hard-line holdout throughout the negotiations and had publicly criticized early drafts of the agreement. [...]

"We can't get any more," Askari said. "In practice, the Americans, they can't do anything alone, according to this agreement. . . . He (Maliki) feels now after all the amendments it's not a perfect agreement but he can now go to the people and say look this is far better to accept this than the other options."

While the United States didn't give in to Iraqi demands for the power to prosecute American soldiers, Maliki now thinks that this is the best deal they can get, Askari said. [...]

Currently the draft calls for U.S. soldiers to withdraw from Iraqi cities by the end of next June and to withdraw from the country by the end of 2011. The latest pact had about 100 changes requested by the Iraqi government, including an agreement for the government to inspect American cargo that it's suspicious of, Askari said.

Stay tuned for the next episode of "Deals of Our Lives".

Maliki Suggests Bush Pushed To Extend U.S. Presence In Iraq To Help McCain

By GottaLaff

Think Progress exclusive:

Last July, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said U.S. troops should be out of Iraq “as soon as possible” and endorsed Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-IL) withdrawal plan. Obama “talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes,” Maliki told Der Spiegel magazine.[...]

Negotiating the post-UN mandate security agreement with Iraq, Bush argued for more time and both sides ultimately agreed that all U.S. troops would be out of Iraq by the end of 2011, not 2010, even though Bush has said previously that “if they were to say, leave, we would leave.”

Why did Bush go back on his word? A source tells ThinkProgress that White House communications staff were concerned that Maliki’s endorsement of the 2010 time line would damage Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) presidential campaign.

Maliki:

Actually, the final date was really the end of 2010 and the period between the end of 2010 and the end of 2011 was for withdrawing the remaining troops from all of Iraq, but they asked for a change [in date] due to political circumstances related to the [U.S] domestic situation so it will not be said to the end of 2010 followed by one year for withdrawal but the end of 2011 as a final date.

[...]

But by endorsing Obama’s time line, Maliki indirectly slighted McCain, who has consistently and strenuously argued against setting a withdrawal date and has even said he wouldn’t mind having U.S. troops in Iraq for 100 years. But Maliki’s new position has left McCain scrambling, first saying its “a pretty good timetable,” but then denying he used “the word timetable” and later settling on “anything is good.”

These slugs would politicize their own kids if they thought it would help them win an election. Oh wait, they already have.

Timeline required

By GottaLaff

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki:

[T]here will be no agreement on a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq unless it includes a 'specific' timeline and is not 'open-ended.'

Obama: 153775

McCain/Bush: 0

H/t: Noah for the video link. Stranahan rocks.

Iraq watch: Bush/McCain defer to Obama

By GottaLaff

Hmm, isn't this what Obama has been suggesting since ... forever? It's nice to see the Chimpenfuhrer in Chief/McRichPOW. using Barack as a role model. In fact, one might wonder if W and POW are contributing to Obama's looking awfully-- dun dun dun-n-n!-- presidential:

In agreeing to pull U.S. combat troops out of Iraqi cities by June, and from the rest of the country by 2011, President Bush has apparently consented to precisely the kind of timetable that, when Democrats called for one, he dismissed as "setting a date for failure." Bush can call it an "aspirational goal" until he turns blue, but a timetable is exactly what it is, thank you very much.

Bush has repeatedly warned that politics and public opinion should have no role in the decision about when to leave Iraq, but apparently he just meant American politics and public opinion. A clear majority of Americans has favored a withdrawal timetable for several years now, putting anti-war Democrats in control of Congress in 2006.

And what did the Bush/McCain twins do?

Bush ignored them. But in the end, he bowed to the will of the Iraqis' elected representatives. After five and a half years of occupation, it was their turn to put a gun to Bush's head: The timetable was the price they demanded for agreeing to let American troops remain in the country beyond the expiration of a United Nations mandate in December.

And what a price he and J Sid will pay! It's the priciest price ever!

Bush's acquiescence pulls the rug out from under Republican presidential candidate John McCain, whose position on Iraq was largely identical to Bush's -- pre-backflip. In some ways, the new timetable is even shorter than the one proposed by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Here's a micro-fiber towel to wipe the egg off of your conjoined faces.

The White House line will be that the timetable is still somewhat conditional -- and only possible because the situation on the ground has improved.

But Bush's real accomplishment here is that he has stalled long enough that none of the deadlines he has now agreed to will be on his watch. This will all be somebody else's problem.

Hmmm. He must believe Obama will win then. Let's consider this a concession.

So the next big question is this: How will Bush explain this turnaround when he finally emerges from his Crawford vacation? Will he try to downplay its significance? Or will he actually suggest that the job is nearly done in Iraq? That would be a bold move indeed, but not one with a lot of evidence to support it.

The next big question after that is how J Sid will untie the knots into which he is now tied and explain how he supports Obama's consistent and now official U.S. policy of troop withdrawal.

He may need a few days by the pool at one of his 9 homes (if he can remember where they are) to relax, unwind, and attempt to memorize his next melodious, patronizing, even-tempered spin... unless he finally blows.

But... but... John Sidney McCain said Maliki wouldn't do this

By GottaLaff


Will J Sid eat his words? Yeah, that'll happen:

Iraqi and U.S. negotiators have completed a draft security agreement that would see American troops leave Iraqi cities as soon as June 30, Iraqi and American officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday. [...]

In addition to spelling out that U.S. troops would move out of Iraqi cities by next summer, the Iraqi government has pushed for a specific date -- most likely the end of 2011 -- by which all U.S. forces would depart the country.

"The Iraqi government pushed for a specific date." J Sid sure knows Maliki well, doesn't he? How do we trust anything the "experienced" candidate says if he was so wrong on this (yes, yes, and on everything else)?

BLITZER: What if Maliki persists? You're president and he says he wants US troops out and he wants them out, let's say in a year or two years or 16 months or whatever. What do you do? Do you listen to the prime minister?

MCCAIN: He won't. He won't. He won't. Because it has to be condition-based.

BLITZER: How do you know?

MCCAIN: Because I know him. And I know him very well. And I know the other leaders. And I know -- I've been there eight times, as you know. I know them very, very well.

Oops.

John Sidney McCain on Obama's 16-month timetable: "I think it's a pretty good timetable"

By GottaLaff


McFlipFloppy can't go one day without changing his story:

Following Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s declaration of support for a 16-month withdrawal timeline from Iraq, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has been struggling to respond. He spent most of this week railing against any “artificial timetable” for withdrawal from Iraq, vaguely insisting that the U.S. will withdraw only “with victory”...

But today he spoke to Wolf Blitzer:

When asked if Maliki would “persist” in requesting a 16-month withdrawal timetable from Iraq, McCain responded, “He won’t. … I know him.” McCain then praised Maliki’s 16-month timetable:

BLITZER: So why do you think he said that 16 months is basically a pretty good timetable?

McCAIN: He said it’s a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it’s a pretty good timetable, as we should — or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground.

The preceding Scooby Doo "Wha-a?" Moment was brought to you by the letters W, T, and F.

Quote-O'-The-Day: McCain advisor's 4-letter-word edition

By GottaLaff

Hey youse guys, tell me if you've heard this one. Y'see, Maliki agrees with Obama's plan for a troop withdrawal from Iraq. Ya with me so far? Good. Okay, see, so that puts John Sidney Mc100Years in a tight spot, see. Know what I mean? Sure ya do. Okay, so here's the money line. Ya with me? Good:

Via e-mail, a prominent Republican strategist who occasionally provides advice to the McCain campaign said, simply,

"We're fucked."

And that's a quote. Ya with me? Good. I'm outta here.

I have no idea why I got into 1940s mode. Probably the quote. It's just a phase, I promise.

Maliki speaks. Obama benefits. U.S. calls. Maliki waffles. Hmmm.

By GottaLaff

I've heard a little about this today via Paddy and by scanning your comments. Well, howdy-do, buckaroos, it seems Maliki and Obama agree after all:

The statement by an aide to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki calling his remarks in Der Spiegel "misinterpreted and mistranslated" followed a call to the prime minister's office from U.S. government officials in Iraq.

Maliki had expressed support for a withdrawal plan similar to that of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama in an interview with Der Speigel. U.S. troops should leave Iraq "As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned," Maliki had said. "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

But after the Spiegel interview was published and began generating headlines Saturday, officials at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad contacted Maliki's office to express concern and seek clarification on the remarks, according to White House spokesman Scott Stanzel.

Later in the day, a Maliki aide released a statement saying the remarks had been misinterpreted, though without citing specific comments.

Don't like the message? Pressure the messenger.

Obama's "Foreign" Friends

Stranahan makes me giggle. Via Americablog- one NSFW word.

Al Maliki Rep Refutes Support For Obama Withdrawal Plan.... Thru CentCom?

Hmmm, wonder why Al Maliki himself didn't correct the statement?

Along those lines, Dr. Ali al-Dabbagh, who the Times calls a spokesman for the Iraqi government, has released a statement saying that Prime Minister Maliki's statement was "misunderstood and mistranslated" and "not conveyed accurately regarding the vision of Senator Barack Obama, U.S. presidential candidate, on the timeframe for U.S. forces withdrawal from Iraq." But as the Times notes al Dabbagh did not specify what had been mistranslated.

Another interesting detail, noted by the Times. al-Dabbagh's statement was released by CentCom. I do not know how often Iraqi government statements are released by CentCom.

Der Speigel stands by their translation.

UPDATE- Clammyc receives another "clarification" from CentCom.

Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan: report

By Paddy


Man, this is sweet. Can't wait for Dana Peroxide to try and bat down this one.

BERLIN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

It is the first time he has backed the withdrawal timetable put forward by Obama, who is visiting Afghanistan and us set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East.

Bush, Maliki agree 'time horizon' for US drawdown

By Paddy


No, you can't make this stuff up. The classic definition of Doublespeak.

TUCSON, Arizona (AFP) - US President George W. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki have agreed on "a general time horizon," not an "arbitrary timetable" for a drawdown of US forces, the White House said Friday.

In talks by video conference Thursday, Bush and Maliki said improving security conditions in Iraq should allow for including that goal in a pending long-term diplomatic and security pact, said spokeswoman Dana Perino.

"Improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals -- such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of US combat forces from Iraq," she said in a statement.

"The president and prime minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal," she said.